list-traces

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains that traces are grouped and returned newest first, and outputs trace objects with timing info. This sufficiently discloses the read-only nature and basic behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is brief (3 sentences plus examples and return note), well-structured, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every element adds value without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides a high-level overview and examples but lacks details on parameter behavior (e.g., since vs last_n_minutes) and output structure, leaving gaps for effective invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It only implicitly addresses project_identifier and last_n_minutes via examples, leaving since, limit, and include_annotations unexplained. This is insufficient for a 5-parameter tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it lists traces for a project, groups spans into traces, and returns newest first. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-trace (single trace) and list-spans (individual spans).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides concrete example usage (e.g., 'Show me the last 10 traces for project default') and mentions expected return, offering implicit guidance. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from alternatives or state when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.